TAXI.com

I'll never understand how one can make a cue that the brief says "only one motif with NO B section" without repeating the motif. The references even repeat theirs more than 3 times AND HAVE B sections. Can anyone explain this to me? I am by all means not saying that the screener was wrong. Obviously, I am wrong. It just doesn't make any logical sense to me and maybe someone here knows what I don't know.

Hi Rick!

It would help if you could post the listing and your track here, so we may better understand what might have prompted this screener’s comments.

I have only joined recently and don’t have first hand experience with the screening process yet, but I don’t think that repeating the motive is your issue. Nor is not having a B section (Hans Zimmer’s Time, to name just one example, builds on a repeating pattern without feeling repetitive).

There are ways of staying with the same motive and still adding variation. It can move from one instrument to another, the accompanyment can build or otherwise change. Heck, even the motive itself can develop while still remaining recognizable (the Close Encounters of the Third Kind comes to mind).

Hope that helps!
Jim.

Your answer is appreciated and helpful.

But about posting my cue and the brief... it's not needed. I don't want another critique and I'm not asking for one. I'm sorry if it was interpreted that way. I posted this because I'd like to know:

How does one NOT repeat the motif when the client doesn't want anything else in the cue AND the references repeat it more than the returned cue? Your answer at the end is a good one!

Our friend cosmicdolphin has answered this before....
topic146048.html#p579664

...and also provided some advice as a pdf if you want it...
avoiding-repetitiveness-t146048-10.html#p588897

SUPER helpful! Thanks! Next time I'll do a search first lol. But it was kind of therapeutic getting it out of my system.

RickElliott wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2024 9:07 am

SUPER helpful! Thanks! Next time I'll do a search first lol. But it was kind of therapeutic getting it out of my system.

Some times, that’s all you need!

And that PDF is a real gold mine. You’ll never hear “too repetitive” again with those tips!

I am my own worst enemy because I feel that I am incredibly lazy in production, and these returns are proof. No longer. You wouldn't believe it if you knew me. I do a lot of stuff around the house. I'm almost 60 yet I still run. I lift weights. I do repairs on the house and anything else that needs it. I am going to apply that part of me in production music.

I really appreciate your help! And also...good luck in your submission too!

RickElliott wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 7:02 pm

I'll never understand how one can make a cue that the brief says "only one motif with NO B section" without repeating the motif. The references even repeat theirs more than 3 times AND HAVE B sections. Can anyone explain this to me? I am by all means not saying that the screener was wrong. Obviously, I am wrong. It just doesn't make any logical sense to me and maybe someone here knows what I don't know.

Matt Vander Boegh made a great video about how to arrange music this way on his YouTube channel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDAt8C5rqqw

Basically, the A section has to have slight variations each time. In the video he will explain that each repetition of the A section should be more and more simplified. But this method also works for continually building with new elements in each repetition of the A section. I have a song that does this below:

https://www.taxi.com/members/PNQZVfSXS0 ... -andromeda

Notice how it's the same melody and chords the entire time, but I'm continually building it up and adding new elements.

Hope this helps!

RickElliott wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 7:02 pm

I'll never understand how one can make a cue that the brief says "only one motif with NO B section" without repeating the motif. The references even repeat theirs more than 3 times AND HAVE B sections. Can anyone explain this to me? I am by all means not saying that the screener was wrong. Obviously, I am wrong. It just doesn't make any logical sense to me and maybe someone here knows what I don't know.

Was about to do it myself but I saw Telefunkin already linked the post I did on this subject for you - I can't believe it was four years ago now !

Hope it helps though. I get easily bored so I find it hard to leave anything too repetitive, but it's a common issue here on the Taxi forums.

Mark

All good examples! Thanks! It actually was different each time. To a listener maybe, who's in a hurry, maybe they wouldn't notice because it sounds the same (two guitars). It wasn't what it was returned for. I tried to keep it simple as suggested by a few people I follow. It was a passing remark, in addition to the main reason. The main reason was that I did NOT make it futuristic as the client asked for, which I totally agree. I just get confused when I follow the example of the references and then told that it was wrong. There was one a couple months ago that the references actually did repeat the motif over and over and over, the only differences between the first section and the last was that there was a hint of more dense drums added, and it said that that was what the client wanted. Lol, "too repetitive" was what I got. I screamed.